People v. Mackson

FOURT, J. This is an appeal from an order of commitment as an alleged narcotics addict.

Defendant came to the Los Angeles Police Department and said, “I want to commit myself to the narcotic hospital. Yesterday I called Deputy D. A. Thale and he suggested that I turn myself in to the LAPD. I’ve been using heroin since 1944. I had my last fix yesterday. I fixed about a % a cap. I have been fixing here in my left arm. Those marks on my right arm are old. I haven’t fixed there in a long time. ...” The police examined defendant’s arms and found on his left arm approximately ten marks, which appeared to be needle marks, ranging in age from 10 to 15 days. Defendant was booked and advised of his constitutional rights. The pupils of defendant’s eyes indicated that he was a user of heroin.

[635]Dr. Lavelle, a licensed physician, examined defendant and formed the opinion and determined that defendant was addicted to the use of narcotics or by reason of repeated use of narcotics was in imminent danger of becoming addicted and unless confined was likely to injure himself or others or to become a menace to the public. The doctor’s opinion was based in part upon defendant’s history which indicated that he was a patient in the facility in 1966, that he was in Patton in 1950 for narcotic withdrawal purposes, that presently defendant had moderately severe narcotic withdrawal, that defendant admitted to being a user and wanted help to break the habit. Defendant was then served with a detention order pursuant to the provisions of the law.

Defendant did on the date of the hearing sign a waiver of rights and notices in the proceedings. That document contained the following:

“ 10. That in the event that the Judge in Department 95 makes a finding at the Summary Hearing that I am addicted to narcotics or am in imminent danger of becoming addicted, and orders my commitment to the Director of Correction for placement at the California Rehabilitation Center, and in the event that I am dissatisfied with the order of the Court, that I may within 10 days after the making of such order demand that the question of my addiction to narcotics be tried by a judge or by a jury in the Superior Court of this County, and that that trial will be set not less than 5 nor more than 10 days from the date of the demand for a court or jury trial. ’ ’

The statement further set forth that defendant had discussed with his counsel the entire proceedings and the advisability and ramifications of his waiving his rights, and that such counsel concurred in his decision to make the waiver. Further, that defendant freely and voluntarily made the waiver and understood and comprehended what he was doing. His counsel also signed the statement and stated in effect that he was satisfied that defendant understood what he was doing, that defendant desired voluntary submission to commitment and that it was to the best interests of defendant to join in the waiver.